From:	Ereskanti <Ereskanti@***.COM>
Subject:	Re: New use for Masking
Date:	Sat, 16 May 1998 22:36:29 EDT

In a message dated 5/16/98 2:18:38 PM US Eastern Standard Time,
evamarie@**********.net writes:

> > Then perhaps a question of you then. Ever consider applying some of the
> > Utility Options with spells ? It is somewhat hard to translate across,
> but it
> > can be done with some really good common sense.
> >
> > Mike
>
> Thats almost as strange as aplying vehicle Quality Factors to
> spirits.
> :)
>
Not entirely. Sticking to the Design Options for Spells for now, let's think
of applying say a "Stealth" option to a particular spell design. It makes the
design time longer, may or may not, depending on the leniency of the GM in
question, make the drain harder. But for every "point" of stealth into the
design, the target number for assensing or noticing the magic (as per the
Totem Masking concept) is increased accordingly.

For lack of better terms, a more well designed spell or concept often
(granted, not always) works better and has a greater degree of understanding
by the user.

-K